166 



GLEANINGS IN BEE CULTURE. 



Mar. 1. 



PivEASE TELL US minutely, Mr. Editor, about 

 getting section honey from two-story hives. 

 I'm green with envy ; doesn't seem to work 

 right for me. Yet one season the only super 

 of honey I got was from a twostory colony. 

 [Now look here, dodtor, after I have written 

 all I have on the subject, told all I know about 

 it, and perhaps more too, for you to ^lozc ask 

 me to please tell you about it " minutely," is, 

 well — adding insult to injury. What is it you 

 want to know, or do not know ? Please put on 

 your specs, and read over, for instance, what I 

 said on page 141. — Ed.] 



Dan White is just right — no use trying to 

 deny that the average sample of extracted 

 honey doesn't begin to equal in quality good 

 comb houey. If extracted-honey men want 

 to keep up with the procession they must give 

 up the figment that comb honey owes its high- 

 er price merely to its looks. All creation is 

 ransacked to find plain sections, fences, and 

 what not to make sections look better; and if 

 half the pains were taken to make extracted 

 honey taste better, comb-honey men would 

 weep over the lessening of the gap between 

 the prices of the two kinds. 



" I HAVE WATCHED hundreds of bees as 

 they came into an observatory hive, whose col- 

 ony was at work in sections, and never saw a 

 siiio/e loaded bee offer to go up to those sec- 

 tions " Thus sa^-s Doolittle in P/vo^ressizr. 

 According to that, wedging up the hive can 

 make no difference about filling outside sec- 

 tions. [But why don't you go into the further 

 question that Mr. Doolittle really touched up- 

 on, whether raising up the hive or increasing 

 the depth of the entrance discouraged swarm- 

 ing, and possibly increased the amount of hon- 

 ey ? I should like to see you and Doolittle 

 lock horns again. I will furnish the arena, 

 and here is the red rag. — Ed.] 



PlE.\SE OBLIGE, ME, Mr. Editor, by calling 

 in the entire edition of Gleanings, Feb. 1"). 

 Then kncck out that "not" on p. 132, first 

 column, 7th line from bottom, making.it "I 

 do know " that two or three comb nuclei win- 

 ter well with a division-board between them. 

 Have W. P. and Barney combined to make 

 out I "don't know," even in the few cases I 

 do know? [Just how that noi-r word got into 

 the circus without a ticket is one of those 

 mysteries that perhaps we shall never unravel. 

 One theory is that, from mere habit, our print- 

 ers had got into the habit of saying " I don't 

 know," and hence concluded that you meant 

 to leave it in. Be that as it may, we regret its 

 insertion, and will take warning to be more 

 careful, if possible, in the future. — Ed.] 



I NOTICE, Ernest, that you and Hutchinson 

 are going to go easy on correspondents' spell- 

 ing. Good. I've long raisht you'd let things 

 be spc/t the way they ot to.be spe/t. [I wish 

 both precedent and custom would permit us to 

 spell by the phonetic method ; that we might 

 even go as far as Bro. York, in the American 

 Bee Journal; but as we do so much printing 

 for other parties, our printers and proofreader 

 would be in a snarl of confusion if we attempt- 

 ed to carry on the two S3'stems — can't do it 

 But isn't 5/><Vf/ a better word than spelt/ To 



use past for passed, and must for Diiissed de- 

 stroys many a fine shade of meaning. Proba- 

 bly our only hope is in making a new alpha- 

 bet, and then find somebody who can deter- 

 mine how "the English languij she is pro- 

 nounct." — Ed.] 



Boardman is with me for cleats instead of 

 handholes, and now comes Doolittle in Pro- 

 gressiz'e, and sa}s, " After trying every thing 

 by waj' of something to lift hives, I prefer the 

 cleat to an}' thing else; especially where hives 

 are carried to and from the cellar every fall 

 and spring." He likes cleats y%. square, one 

 on each end. [I am half inclined to believe 

 that you and Boardman are right ; but keep 

 this to yourself : We make the handholes be- 

 cause they are cheaper, take less room in crat- 

 ing, and because bee-keepers generally are sat- 

 isfied with them. I suppose the fact is, the 

 average bee-man does not lug his bees in and 

 out of the cellar as much as you and Board- 

 man do, and that is whv he doesn't complain. 

 —Ed.] 



Gleanings mentioned, p. (3, a record of 700 

 lbs. from Texas. Editor Hill, of .iin. Bee- 

 keeper, takes alarm at the shrinkage of 300 lbs. 

 in that Texan report of years f*go. Better re- 

 consider, Ernest. Butsaj-, friend Hill, you've 

 done s'ill worse by awarding the belt t ) W. S. 

 Hart for 1200 lbs. from two colonies. [When 

 I spoke of that record of 700 lbs. on page (> I 

 could not quite determine in my own mind 

 whether it was 700 or lOOO. Rather thm make 

 the yarn too big, I thought it would be safer 

 to take the lower figure, and so named it in 

 my answer. Some years after the party re- 

 ported that big )-ield, one or two of his neigh- 

 bors, who claimed to know the facts, and who 

 met me at one of the conventions, said the rec- 

 ord was greatly " padded." Perhaps after all 

 my 7(lO mark was nearer correct than the 1()(H) 

 m rk that you and Mr. Hill say was actually 

 reported. — Ed.] 



Prof. Cook has riz up against sweet clover. 

 Called to account In' Editor York, he liardl}- 

 seems willing to admit the testimony of those 

 who say it's valuable for forage — thinks stock 

 must have been starved to it, or else excep- 

 tional soil or conditions gave exceptional qual- 

 ity. Yes, but there's such a lot of exceptions. 

 [My, oh my ! where has Prof. Cook been these 

 years? If he will come out east again and call 

 upon friend Boardman, and a dozen others I 

 could name, at the right time of year, he will 

 find that stock often prefer it to other fodder. 

 The Ohio Experiment Station once opposed 

 the clover, but has now taken back all the bad 

 things it said of it, and actually favors its in- 

 troduction. Notwithstanding we see miles of 

 it growing like weeds along the roadside, it 

 certainly has proved to be a great blessing, be- 

 cause it grows where nothing else can live. It 

 is true, very many regard the clover as a nox- 

 ious weed ; but that does not prove that it is. 

 In some parts of the West there are himdreds 

 of acres of it grown, and hundreds of tons of 

 if cut for fodder. A\'here nothing else grows 

 it is a Godsend. I should almost as soon ex- 

 pect to hear Prof. Cook say the world is not 

 round as to argue against sweet clover. — Ed.] 



